Golden era productions

81

82

12 FEBRUARY 1958

trying to counter them with a number of ups—it's the fact that it's a stuck flow and requires some jiggling before it shakes loose. Get the idea?

Well, any time you see a stuck needle on a preclear, you're looking at a stuck flow.

Now, the oddity is, is the nature of the beast very often establishes where he's stuck. Man is quite often—this is not infallible, but he's quite often stuck on an outflow. The nature of the beast. A man to a marked degree is an outflow object. A woman is an inflow object. And she is quite ordinarily stuck on inflow. And from that rule alone, I would select which side of Help to run. If I was running a girl, I'd know she was stuck on inflow, I would suppose without even bothering to look it up very much—no E-Meter. I would simply start running her on "How could you help me?" And I wouldn't run it very long. I'd follow it up very rapidly with a nice bridge over to "How could I help you?" And I'd ask a couple that way. And then I would come back the other way again with quite a few, don't you see? And then I'd give it a little bit of inflow with a lot of outflow.

Now, you understand inflow and outflow are directions. These are the most standard directions. But there are directions from right to left and left to right, too. These are—also get stuck-flowed. You don't have to worry about that too much unless you get into the Black and White body phenomena. You'll see this show up as a stroke. An individual has a stroke with half of his body paralyzed; well, he's got a stuck flow thataway. And you can theoretically jiggle this flow and get it started back to the right in some fashion, or back to the left.

Well, this tells you when you ought to shift—tells us when you ought to shift a flow. It's when a needle is loose or the flowing is occurring. You don't shift flows on nulls—a null needle. You shift it on an active needle.

Now, let me give you a very good example of this. We sit down and we're going to process Joe. And we don't think about flows or try to figure it out or ask a few questions either way. We see that he has a very sticky needle; it's very sticky. We're going to shake it loose somehow or another. So we say, "Well, we'll just run this for an hour for each one of these questions and see where we are." We choose at random, "How could you help me?"

He's been a YMCA secretary for years, see, been helping everybody everywhere, you know? You say, "How could you help me?" You're going to run this for an hour? Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! And you say, "How could you help me?"

And he says, "Well. . . (long pause) Seems utterly impossible." See? He's run into the flow phenomenon. He finally answers you. And he answers you some more. And he answers you some more. And he's having a devil of a time answering this. And all of a sudden he goes, dyeeh—thud. You knock him right out with the question. Well, if you'd sorted it out on the E-Meter, used your head about it and figured out where it was . . .

You can be fooled, you know, because there is such a thing as an inverted flow. The fellow, long after it got stuck, decided to reverse some. Only he wasn't being audited, he just—he just went the other way.

YMCA secretary eventually said, "I've helped people for years. Now, some of these blankety-blanks have got to help me!" Then he never accepts anybody's help because it isn't auditing, see? Only he's trying to run the other flow. He can get awfully wound up doing this, too. "I've given my all for years, now somebody can do something for me." You get that. That's an overrun flow at work.

HAVINGNESS, ANATEN, FLOWS IN RELATION TO CLEARING

You sort this YMCA boy out and you say, "Now, how could I help you?" See, you just figured out where he was. Yabble, yabble, yap, yap, yap. You get the idea? You're liable to get something on this. You're even liable to get an automaticity. This is set up to run automatically reverse-end-to or something of the sort. Something's liable to happen.

But if you ran that very long, you'd start one of these irregular patterns going. So you'd have to ask him how he could help you. In other words, you couldn't run very long on, "How could I help you?" You'd have to run, "How could you help me?" a time or two, or five, you see? And then get back on your end of it for a half an hour or fifteen minutes or something, before you could flip this thing the other way. You get the idea?

You'd eventually see the needle behave in this fashion: At first it would be very stuck. And it would become stuck, and as you worked the case—the tone handle didn't drop very much but started to rise, and it could rise with considerable rapidity. And then soon you notice that you had to have the sensitivity straight up at twelve o'clock in order to run this particular case at the beginning, and you suddenly realize you have too much sensitivity.

Well, by rule of thumb, eventually, when you are no longer working with constants and you can keep the sensitivity in mind and know exactly what it does and so forth, you would reduce your sensitivity. But the point is you've got too much sensitivity—the needle is flopping too far.

At the beginning of the session, why, the can test isn't too good, but he was getting a normal drop for various things. And then the needle would come back up, sort of slow and sluggish; it wasn't rising any to amount to anything. Sticky. And you say, "There must be something wrong with this meter action, it's become gluey lately. Maybe there's some dust in it." Yeah, there's some dust in it all right. There's a stuck flow in it, in the preclear. All right.

This needle is—you know, you get a drop. And the drop is—well, you know—and it comes back up again just somehow. Well, you run it after a while, and you say, "Well, you mentioned the word girls a moment ago. What did that mean to you?" or something, or some irregular auditing question. And you get, whoosh, whoosh. You know?

"Oh, I hate women"—whoosh. See? Down, up. Tone arm, two points— two points up. A moment or two later, he's liable to tell you, "Oh, women are all right. As a matter of fact, I've always loved them. I love women." You know, his opinions are almost as wild and changeable as the tone handle.

Well, don't think he's gotten over something. He's just centralized one of these flows. That's all. You're just somewhere near the middle. And it's a good place to quit. That's a good place to bridge because you could run the flow you're running sufficiently long to free it up and take it right downstairs and stick it again, and stick it but good.

Now fortunately, the mechanics of auditing themselves, your presence, the havingness, your attention upon him and numerous other factors, are at work. The significance of the button itself is quite interesting in its action here. And as a result you will overcome a sufficient amount of this so that you will not notice in running this process, pure phenomena. You'll get vagaries of phenomena.

In order to notice this pure phenomena, you'd have to say, "Get the idea of giving me a pen," or something like this. "Get the idea of giving me a pen. Get the idea of giving me a pen. Get the idea of giving me a pen."

"Yaah, dyaah . . ." Pretty soon the guy says, "Well, I can get the idea of giving you a pen." And about two more times he goes dyeeh.

83

84

12 FEBRUARY 1958

Now, you say, "Get the idea of my giving you a pen."

Grog, grog. You know? "The idea of giving me a pen . . ."

And finally, "Yeah. Well, I don't know what we're being dopey about."

Now, that, you see—that has no therapy involved in it beyond the repetitive auditing command, so you would get a pure look at phenomena. You'd get the phenomena of flows there, purely.

But where you're running a process which has considerable value, where you're doing a good job of auditing, where—or all of these other things are occurring there, you will sometimes find that all the other things overcome this flow phenomena. You get the idea? So you can go ahead and override it. So you can stick the needle stuck and it still comes free. You get the idea? You only wasted a couple of hours of an intensive—the only thing that you did wrong, you see? It just wound up as not a worse result, but just wasted time. You spent a half an hour kicking the preclear awake, you know, something like this—and keep on running the flow that's putting him to sleep.

You'll eventually run on by it and move things around. All you're doing is putting time on an intensive. In the final analysis, today, if you just, I guess, audited by formula, we'd get there someday. You'd get there someday. You audit—you know, without any understanding or any ramifications, and audit without an E-Meter. And you didn't—you just ran the thing to be sure that it was flat, you know? You audited two more hours on the thing after it was null, but you were sure sure it was flat!

Everything that you do in the way of understanding and expertness actually tends to shorten the intensive, don't you see? So the more expert you are, the shorter a clearing job you will do. You see that?

Now, in view of the fact that we're not running a contest in any way except to stay in the finite area of time, it's senseless to take two lifetimes to clear somebody. You won't make it. The truth of the matter is if you don't audit somebody for a week, you never get to know him. You see? I mean, there's a social limit on the bottom of it. And as a result you could—you could have extremes here, and it tends to fix itself. And all that's demanded of you is to clear somebody in a few weeks. And we'd say, well, if you couldn't clear somebody in a few weeks, certainly with the top of seven or eight weeks, saying it was a very, very spun-in case, or something like that, then—then there would be something wrong with your procedure or your grasp of the mechanics of the thing. It would be doing it somewhere too much by rote or without understanding or without—without a sufficient grasp of it. Don't you see? So, all errors lengthen.

In surveying, you know, there's no such thing as a shortening error. There's only lengthening errors, if I remember rightly. Any error you make tends to lengthen. Similarly, in auditing, any error you make tends to lengthen.

Now, nobody is saying you've done anything wrong because I'm sure you have all looked at and run into this in the last day or so in auditing. You've known something else was going on here. So I might as well—now that most of you are off Help and won't get a look at it again—I might as well tell you what the phenomena that you were looking at was.

But the time to bridge is when the needle is free. Time to bridge is when the needle is free. If a needle frees and you continue running in the same direction—that is, "How could I help you? How could I help you? How could I help you?" and the needle eventually gets free—remember the needle will stick again if you keep on saying, "How can I help you? How can I help . . ." or

HAVINGNESS, ANATEN, FLOWS IN RELATION TO CLEARING

"How could I help you? How could I help you? How could I help you?" You'll eventually stick the needle once more. It may take you a long time to do so, and it is not critical. You merely have to know the gross effects of it; you merely have to know that it doesn't much matter when you're running Help in brackets when you bridge.

You're not going to upset anybody unless he's getting a whopperoo of a drop. If he's getting a terrific drop—you just, now, "How could I help you?" and it went five dials down. You say, "Well, I guess I'll bridge now." You'll probably be in trouble.

But the preclear looks like he's doing all right, and you bridge.

Now, supposing a preclear started to go anaten. It's much better to let him go right on anaten, isn't it, and keep on going? Aw, the hell it is. So if he starts to go anaten, you bridge. Got it? And get the flow running in the opposite direction. "How could I help you?" is, of course, opposite to "How could you help me?" See? "How could you help your wife?" is opposite to "How could your wife help you?" See that? "How could you help that leg?" is opposite to "How could that leg help you?" Get the idea? "How could that leg help somebody else?" "How could somebody else help that leg?" These are opposite flows, no matter where you are on the bracket.

Pc starts to go anaten, you're actually wasting time, and it's a lengthening error not to bridge (snap) right now.

But you're not going to get into trouble if you don't, beyond perhaps having a preclear who's totally anaten for about three or four minutes and is actually unable to respond, and you have to shake him up and so forth. There's no necromancy going to happen. You're not going to kill anybody.

If you do overrun these things and you do plow them through and you do stretch the thing, it's not a—it's not a stand-up-and-shoot-'em case. It's just in the direction of being neat. You know? It's just being neat. It's the difference between auditing somebody a half-hour and auditing somebody a couple of hours. You get the idea?

The sharper you are as an auditor, the less time you will spend clearing somebody. That doesn't mean you're in a speed contest, it just happens to be true.

You'll clear somebody anyhow, eventually. Wait until you are running a whole bunch of people who are running a whole bunch of people. And you will watch this happen. Your fingers will itch. You'll say, "(Dzzz! Why can't I get ahold of him here?) Listen, is it all right with you if we say this process just one more time, and then change to another one? How are you getting along? That's very fine. Now, how could you help me? Ah! (pant, pant)." Catch that preclear before he went down for the last count, see? You'll die as a supervising auditor sometimes, to watch somebody just overrun this and overrun it and overrun it and not know what he's looking at, not know what he's looking at, and all of a sudden, thug, somebody's gone. He's "went," he'll be "went" for the next hour or two. You see? And that would just be an overrun flow.

If you were there and you were being smart, you'd just free the devil out of the needle until it was a very loose needle. You'd bridge and get onto another one. Free the devil out of the needle, get onto a very tight bridge to the next part of the bracket. Free the needle up, get onto the next part of the bracket. Free the needle up some more, get onto the next part of the bracket. After a while just have the needle so it just revolves emptily around the pin. You got it made. You got—you got somebody who's clear on that process. All right.

There's another influence that will walk in on you, or apparently walk in on you, particularly when you were supervising somebody auditing who isn't

85

86

12 FEBRUARY 1958

too good at the TRs and so on. And that is, you will look at nervousness, agitation, anger and so on in the preclear, which has nothing to do with the clearing but has everything to do with the auditor because of difficulties in handling the communication formula and in handling the preclear—boo-boos, misstated commands, that sort of thing. And these all make it look as though the process is running havingness down.

Now, the process, "How could I help you?"—CCH Ob—that process does not run down havingness if perfectly audited. But for it never to run down havingness demands a job of auditing more perfect than practically anybody is able to 100 percent, all the time, turn in. You got that? Because some of the perfection of auditing is the consideration of the preclear, don't you see? So you could do a perfect job of auditing and the preclear could still know that you'd done something wrong. You got it? So there's 50 percent of it on automatic, right?— as far as the consideration of the perfection of auditing.

And whenever you get an idea that it isn't right—in other words, every time you get a critical idea—you get a havingness difficulty. Critical— havingness. Just think of those two things hand in glove, and you won't make a mistake of turning somebody loose who is (quote) "Clear" (unquote), who is in a terribly critical state. Person obeys all of the rules of being Clear and just chopping everybody up. His havingness is out the bottom. Something has happened to his havingness, one way or the other. Got that?

Naturally, what would you patch up? You'd run some Havingness Process. And that is the answer most of the time.

Now, when you see an agitation or a fogginess or a don't-careness or an out-of-sessionness or something of this sort, you can add it up to flows if it's anaten. But if it's agitation, the rest of this—distraction, sarcasm and so forth—don't always add it up to the fact that an aberration is coming to the fore. The preclear, because of his aberrated state, looks at you and considers that something has gone wrong, that you have done something wrong. And it's necessary for you at that time to patch up the ARC or repair his havingness. You can do either one.

I patch up the ARC, preferably. If that doesn't work, I soak into it with some Havingness. If I patch up the ARC, I generally conceive, also, that he is low on havingness, and at the earliest possible moment bridge into some Havingness, give him some Havingness and then get on with the process. You got the idea? This is a system. It's no better than a system; it's just something you do.

Possibly an equally workable system from your viewpoint: Instead of wasting hours of yak-yak of "What did I do wrong?" and getting into an argument with the preclear and losing your own temper (which you would never do), possibly it'd just be faster to bridge into some Havingness and then bridge out back into the process again. You got the idea?

Now, Help, run jaggedly, will just cutlass havingness to ribbons. It'll practically finish it. You never saw the like of it. You're running the wrong side of the flow. All it does is make the preclear groggy and nervous and upset. He basically feels something is wrong, so therefore he says something is wrong with you. Don't you see?

Well, one of the ways to get him over it is not necessarily to be more technically expert in running flows—that too!—it's just to run some Havingness. Got it? When in doubt use Havingness. When in doubt remedy Havingness. Remember?

HAVINGNESS, ANATEN, FLOWS IN RELATION TO CLEARING

Now, if you ran somebody who was highly critical, his APA was—Critical was ten points below bottom, or actually anyplace between there and the middle and the first quarter of the graph (you know, that'd be a -50 Critical)—and you wanted to run Help, you actually would probably get there fastest by choosing exactly the proper leg of Help to run, getting it a little bit flat, (snap) bridging to Connectedness — got it? (snap) Get that so he's not comm lagging too badly—he can still talk—(snap) bridge to the next part of Help, (snap) bridge to Connectedness, (snap) bridge to the next part of Help, (snap) bridge to Connectedness, (snap) bridge to the next part of Help, (snap) bridge to Connectedness. Got the idea? All right.

How do flows influence "Mock it up and keep it from going away?" Do flows have anything to do with it? The automaticity of flows may influence it, and you may get phenomena. But you're handling terminals, aren't you? And the funny part of it is that you are out of the field of flows.

Now, I've told you exactly why, in this lecture, a preclear cannot mock up something and see it. Got that?

I've also told you exactly how you make it possible for him to see something. You equalize his flows, don't you? Hm? And he'll see something. And that is one of the reasons Help is working.

Now, let's say a fellow has some great big screens out in front of him. Boy, is he resisting an inflow, you would say. Funny part of it is, his resistance to an inflow is only a quantitative violence of outflow. Got it? You would be merely critical, and not technical or therapeutic at all, if you said this fellow was resisting all inflows. It's a remark, it describes the situation, but it doesn't describe the basic remedy for it and therefore is not an adequate description. This fellow who has a big bunch of screens, who is resisting all inflows, is in actuality over-outflowed. He's on a stuck flow. And what you see is the black wipe-out of no further flow. He can't flow any longer in that direction. Got it?

Now, you can do some weird things with this—you can do some weird things with this, but the best one that we have so far is the Help button.

Now, let's supposing somebody has been there standing at the drill press. Got it? He's standing at the drill press and he has got a one-way flow going. Get the idea? It's a one-way flow. It's going thataway. See, it isn't just mass— the drill press to himself—it's actually, he's got a bunch of metal or something that is flowing in one direction. It just keeps on flowing in that direction, endlessly. Well, maybe it can go on flowing if you get enough and wear out enough drill-press men, but the funny part of it is that his mind will get stuck on it. He'll get stuck on it, mentally.

Well, although the direction is over here to the right and although you could remedy it in the pure field of energy, you better not. You better not. He has a field. He's got a great big screen over here to his right. Got that? If you were to ask him how that metal strip could help him, you'd have to shake it up by how could he help it—question for question, don't you see—because it's really stuck. "How could it help him? How could he help it? How could it help him? How could he help it? How could he . . ." Get the idea? Back and forth.

And then all of a sudden, "How could it help you? How could it help you? How could it help you? How could that metal strip help you? How could that metal strip . . ." And all of a sudden you'll see the bank go, vroom—flip! And great black blankets of things fly around in the air, and things go purple and green and white and so forth.